REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

Aarav Shukla Appellant

V/S

STATE OF U.P. Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

RUCHI MAJOO V. SANJEEV MAJOO [REFERRED TO]
PRATEEK VS. SHILPI [REFERRED TO]
KANIKA GOEL VS. STATE OF DELHI THROUGH STATION HOUSE OFFICER [REFERRED TO]
JEEWANTIPANDEY VS. KISHAN CHANDRA PANDEY [REFERRED TO]
SURINDER KAUR SANDHU VS. HARBAX SINGH SANDHU [REFERRED TO]
ELIZABETH DINSHAW VS. ARVAND M DINSHAW [REFERRED TO]
NIL RATAN KUNDU VS. ABHIJIT KUNDU [REFERRED TO]
GAURAV NAGPAL VS. SUMEDHA NAGPAL [REFERRED TO]
V RAVI CHANDRAN VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
SHILPA AGGARWAL VS. AVIRAL MITTAL [REFERRED TO]
PAUL MOHINDER GAHUN VS. SELINA GAHUN [REFERRED TO]
AVIRAL MITTAL VS. STATE [REFERRED TO]
KAMLA DEVI VS. STATE [REFERRED TO]
M K HARI GOVINDAN VS. A R RAJARAM [REFERRED TO]
GOVERDHAN LAL VS. GAJENDRA KUMAR [REFERRED TO]
SONDUR GOPAL VS. SONDUR RAJINI [REFERRED TO]
ARATHI BANDI VS. BANDI JAGADRAKSHAKA RAO [REFERRED TO]
SURYA VADANAN VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU AND ORS. [REFERRED TO]
VIVEK SINGH VS. ROMANI SINGH [REFERRED TO]
NITHYA ANAND RAGHAVAN VS. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANOHTER [REFERRED TO]
JUSTICE K.S. PUTTASWAMY (READ.) VS. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. [REFERRED TO]
LAHARI SAKHAMURI VS. SOBHAN KODALI [REFERRED TO]
LAHARI SAKHAMURI VS. SOBHAN KODALI [REFERRED TO]
TEJASWINI GAUD AND ORS VS. SHEKHAR JAGDISH PRASAD TEWARI AND OTHERS [REFERRED TO]
YASHITA SAHU VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Ms. Rosemarry Raju, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. Ashish Deep Verma, learned counsel for the private respondent, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

(2.) Instant habeas corpus petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by petitioner no. 2 Abhishek Shukla on behalf of the corpus Arav Shukla, who is his minor son, against state respondent and respondent no. 3 (the mother of the corpus and wife of petitioner no. 2) with following prayers:-

(3.) During pendency of present writ petition, an amendment application has been moved by petitioner no. 2 with prayer to add the prayer in writ petition at Sr. No. i-(a) in prayer clause of writ petition i.e. i-(a) issue an appropriate writ, order or direction directing the Authorities to produce the minor child namely Arav Shukla, a U.S. Citizen and direct the repatriation of the minor child back to U.S. in compliance of orders dtd. 24/12/2020 passed by the Superior Court of Washington, King County, U.S. being Case No. 20-3-04720-5-SEA- and also to deposit the passport of the minor child and other documents of the minor child which ought to be delivered to the petitioner no. 2 to enable the petitioner no. 2 to take minor child back to U.S.

Click here to view full judgment.

AARAV SHUKLA Vs. STATE OF U.P.

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address